tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 29, 2015 2:00am-4:01am EDT
pacific theaters. thus making historic contributions to the victories of the world's anti-fascist war. history is a mirror. only by drawing lessons from history can the world avoid repeating past calamity. we should review history with awe and caution. changed, butot be the future can be shaped. mind is notory in to perpetuate hatred, rather, it is for mankind not to forget its lesson. remembering history does not we aim to pass the torch of peace from generation to generation.
mr. president, dear colleagues, the united nations has gone through the test of time over the past seven decades. it has witnessed efforts made by all countries to uphold peace, pursue peace, and build homeland cooperation. having reached a new historical starting point, the united nations needs to address the central issue of how to better promote world peace and development in the 21st century. the world is going through a historical process of accelerated evolution. the peace and progress will be powerful enough to penetrate the and s of war, poverty, backwardness. the movement was a multiwar, and the rise of developing countries irresistable
rend of history. there are new challenges we must face. the idea is to create a world truly shared by all. peace, democracy, freedom are he commonalities of man kind and the goals of the united nations. yet, these goals are far from being achieved, and we must continue our endeavor to meet them. n today's world, all countries are interdependent and share a common future.
builds a new er title for win-win cooperation. a community of shared future for mankind. to achieve this goal, we need to make the following effort. e should build partnerships in which countries treat each other as equals and show mute twal understanding. the principal of sovereign understanding underpins the charter. ll countries are equals. the strong and rich should not bully the small and poor. the principle of sovereignty not only means the sovereignty and territory of all countries are inviolable and their internal
affairs are not subject to interference, it also means that all countries like to independently treat systems and social tasks should be upheld. [applause] we should adopt new provisions for win-win outcomes and reject the outdated mind set means one's gain is the other's loss or that winner shall take all. complication is an important form of democracy.
and it should also become an important means of exercising contemporary international government. we should resolve these differences without confrontation. we should forge a global partnership and embrace a new approach to state-to-state relations, one that features dialogue rather than confrontation. major countries should follow the principles of no conflict, confrontation and win cooperation in handling their negotiations. should treat small countries as equals and take a right approach to justice. [applause]
we should create a future with shared benefits. in the age of global economics, all countries are interlinked and have an impact on one another. no country can maintain absolute -- no country can achieve stability out of another country's instability. the law of the jungle leaves the weak at the mercy of the strong. it is p the way for countries to conduct their relations. those that use force will find they are only lifting a rock from under their own feet. we should abandon cold war
mentality and foster a new vision of common, cooperative, and sustainable security. we should give full flight to the central world of the united nations and its security council in ending conflict and keeping peace. so as to turn hostility into amnity. we should find international cooperation in international and social sales and take a holistic approach to addressing traditional and non-traditional security threats to prevent conflicts from breaking out in the first place. we should promote open, innovative, and inclusive development that benefits all. the 2008 international crisis has taught us that allowing
countries to blindly pursue profit can only create a crisis and that global prosperity cannot be built on the shaky foundation of a market without moral constrainted -- constraints. the brewing gas between rich and poor is both unsustainable and unfair. it is important for us to use both the invisible hand and the visible hand to form synergy between market forces and government function and strive to achieve both efficiency and airness. development is meaningful only when it is sustainable and inclusive.
to achieve such inclusion twal s openness, mute assistance, and cooperation. in the world today, close to 800 million people still live in extreme poverty. nearly six million kids die before the age of 5 each year and nearly 60 million children are unable to go to school. the just concluded u.n. sustainable summit that adopted he post-2015 agenda. we must translate our commitments into actions and work together to ensure that everyone is free from want, everyone has access to development, and everyone lives with dignity.
[applause] we should increase intercivilization exchange to promote harmony and respect for differences. the world is simply more colorful as a result of its cultural diversity. diversity breeds exchanges. exchanges create integration, and integration makes progress ossible. in their interacks, civilizations must respect differences. only through diversity can the world maintain many and survive. no civilization is superior to thers.
different civilizations should have dialogue instead of trying to replace each other. the history of man kind is a process of exchanges, interactions, and intergration amufpk -- integration among different civilizations. we should respect all civilizations and treat each other as equals. we should draw inspiration from each other to boost the creative development of human civilization. should build abeco-system that puts mother nature and green development first. man kind may utilize the nature and try to transform it, but we are, after all, a part of the ature. we should care for nature and not place ourselves above it.
we should reconcile industrial evelopment with nature and pursue harmony between man and nature to achieve sustainable development of the world and the all-around development of man. to build a sound ecoling is vital to man kind's future. all members of the international community should work together to build a sound global eco environment. we should protect nature. we should firmly pursue green, and rbon, circular sustainable development. china will shoulder its share of
responsibility, and china will continue to play its part in his common endeavor. we also urge global communities to honor their emission reduction commitments and help developing countries mitigate and adapt to climate change. [applause] mr. president, dear colleagues, the over 1.3 billion chinese people and more are endeavoring to recognize the chinese dream f great international renewal. the dream of the chinese people is closely connected with the dreams of other peoples of the world. we cannot recognize the dream of the chinese people without a stable international order and
the understanding, support, and help from the rest of the world. the realize zation of the chinese dream will -- the realization of the chinese dream will contribute to global peace and development. china will continue to participate in building world peace. we are committed to peaceful development, no matter how the international landscape may evolve and how strong china may ecome, china will never pursue expansion or sphere of influence. [applause]
china will continue to contribute to global development and the win-win strategy of opening up. we are willing to share our development, experience, and opportunities with other countries. and we welcome other countries to board china's express train so all of us will achieve financial development. [applause] we will stay committed to the peaceful path. china was the first country to put its signature on the u.n. charter. we will continue to uphold the principles of the u.n. charter. quha will continue to stand together with other developing countries. we firmly support greater
representation and voice of developing countries, especially african countries in the ternational governans -- governance system. i wish to take this opportunity to announce china's decision to establish a 10-year, $1 billion u.s. dollars, cha-cha-u.n.-peace development fund to support the unup's work.
to advance multilateral ooperation and develop development, i also wish to announce that china will join the new u.n. peacekeeping capability readiness system. and has thus decided to take the lead in setting up a permanent peacekeeping police squad and form a peacekeeping standby force. of 8,000 troops. i also wish to announce that china will provide eye total of $100 million u.s. dollars of free military assistance in the union in the next five years to
support the african immediate esponse to crisis. mr. president, dear colleagues, as the united nations enters a new decade, let us unite even more closely to forge a new partnership of win-win ofperation and ape community hared future for man kind. let the vision of a world free of war take root in our heart. let fairness spread acrs the world. thank you all. [applause]
>> twished heads of delegations, mr. secretary general of the united nations, president, it was 70 years ago that on behalf of their peoples, the member states of this organization signed the united nations charter. we pledged ourselves to preserve future generations from the scourge of war and to build a , guided of relationship by a set of principles and that should bring about
an era of peace and justice for ll humanity. however, from that moment there has been wars of aggression and interference in the affairs of the state. we have witnessed the ousting of overeign governments by force. d the recolonizations of trarets. and under the pretext of alleged human rights violations. the covert and illegal use of folings to attack other states is unacceptable.
we need to advance and protect uman rights. despite the fact that the arter calls us to reaffirm fundamental human rights and the dignity and worth of a human person, to millions of people, the fulfillment of human rights emains a utopia. humanity is denied the right to live and peace and the right of development. it is actually poverty and inequality that is the cause of conflict.
conflict generated by colonializim and the plundering f regional people. the commitment made in 1945 to promote social progress and better standards of life for the people along with their economic and social sveltement remain an illusion when 795 million people go hungry. are llion adults illiterate, and 71,000 children perish every day from cureable iseases. annual military expenses worldwide amount to $1.7 rillion.
barely a fraction of that figure could actually resolve the most pressing problems afflicting umanity. it was usually presented as the model to imitate has practically disappeared. the election system and traditional parties that rely on money and publicity are growing increasingly detatched and distant from the aspirations of heir people. this is threatening the very existence of human species, and the differentiated esponsibilities for this
reality since there is an indisputable reality and not every country is equally accountable. the complications of climate change has a particularly devastating effect on the small, eveloping, island nations. the same is happening in africa th the relentless advance of desertification. we stand in solidarity with our care peen brothers and demand they are treated in a different
and differentials way. we support the african countries and demand fair treatment of them as well as the development of technology and financial resources. the development of states, and etchly designing by the heads and states of government in 2014 of the proclamation of latin america and the care -- shows we can move beyond our differences toward unit, and not only that, but toward the achievement of common goals while still respecting our diversity. [applause]
we stand in solidarity with the caribbean nations. basically in a world where racial discrimination and repression against communities scendants has increased. we reaffirm our commitment that the people of puerto rico be free and independent after more than a century of colonial omination. we stand in solidarity with the republic of argentina in its
fair claim over the south georgia and south sandwich islands. we reintegrate our support, too, in solidarity with president and the brazilian people in of their achievements and the stability f their country. we reaffirm our intention to the expanse of nato to the russian borders. we welcome the so-called nuclear agreement with the islamic epublic of rein -- iran.
that ovate our confidence the syrian people are capable of resolving their dispute by themselves and we demand external influence in that country. a fair solution to the middle east conflict unquestionably requires the true exercise by the palestinian people of their right to build their own state within the borders existing 67.or to 19 we support their capital being n east jeruslem.
people in eastern urope. this is the result of countries in the middle east and africa. as well as poverty and und -development preveiling in countries in the african continent. e u.n. should take on -- should help the crisis it helped create. after 56 years in which the cuban people put up resistance
diplomatic relations have been reestablished between cuba and he united states of america. -- conflicts begin -- now his will only be achieved with our country illegally occupied by guantanamo base, and destablizing programs against the island. and when our people are competence stated for the human and economic damages they still ndure. while the blockade remains in force, we will continue
viewing the draft resolution with the embargo imposed by the united states of america against uba. to the people who have sponsored our reforms, we wish to return the appreciation of the cuban people and its government for our continued support. mr. president, cuba is celebrating with profound commitment the anniversary of he organization. we acknowledge efforts have been made throughout the years.
though not enough has been done to save present and future generations from the scourge of war and protect the right to sustainable development without xclusions. the united nations should be and from unilateralism closer reforms to democratize it and bring it closer to the people. , the historic leader of the cuban revolution, stated in this hall, 50 years ago, and i quote, in anyone understands the fundamental obligation of the united nations is to save the world not only from war but also from under development, hunger, diseases, poverty and the destruction of the national
resources indispensible to human existence. and he added, and they should do it soon before it is too late. nd of quote. the international community can always depend on cuba to rise its honest voice against injustice, inequality, under development, discrimination, and manipulation and for the establishment of a more fair and equityable order that really focuses on the human being, his dignity, and well being. thank you. [applause]there will be a meetih
guest: good morning. host: what is it that you do? we are a policy watchdog, we are a think tank, we undertake a number of research policies -- projects and we produce a number of reports. we are involved in a number of policy engagements, mainly with governments, but also supporting some of the work with the nongovernment community. host: we want to talk about the funding of the united states, not only for the -- the funding of the united nations, not only for the united states. funding for the indicted nations is varied. on one hand there is a mandatory contribution that members have to make to be a member.
this is called an assessed contribution. the budget of the that applies to the peacekeeping arrangements. work ofr part of the the united nations, most of the work of the united nations is funded by involuntary contributions, mainly from governments. that covers a whole range of emergency, developing relief, food and support to refugees. the split is 60% to the voluntary contributions and 40% to the assessed contributions, which is more or less half and half between the peacekeeping on the one hand and the mandatory standards of the work of the united nations undertakes. host: if you look at breakdowns of the contributions, the united
states is on top of that list with over $600 million. as well as japan, germany and france. the figures that you are looking at there, they are related to a formula. the formula is more or less related to the worth of a gross tos related to messick product. corrects the percentage, it would be a higher percentage that the united states pays, but it is important that no one country should pay over 25%, so the top level was ,educed and at the bottom level so the countries at the bottom, it ended up being that they should pay much less than they should pay.
there is a ceiling and a floor. as far as the voluntary contributions, how are other countries doing, including the united states, as far as meeting their commitments? voluntary,use it is it is up to the government. if you look at the patterns with the united states, you might see something like a similar average across the whole of the system. terms of, 20% from contributions. but if you take a closer look, you may see that some issues receive 30%, because those issues are considered a priority for the united states. and maybe less where the united states feels there is something they don't want to be involved in or contribute to.
it is more of the assessed contributions where you have people not meeting what they are obliged to contribute to. there is an honor roll. the honor roll is those governments that pay up in time, in full, at the beginning of the year, because obviously this is the money that the u.n. needs to meet its budget, and there are currently 25 countries on that honor roll that have done that this year, and the united states is not one of those countries. host: we are talking about the funding of the united nations. barbara adams from the global policy forum is joining us for this discussion. talk to us about the overall budget for the u.n.. what is the figure? and what gets done with the money? the overall figure is
just over $40 billion, that cost -- that covers all of the activities of the united nations. the full range that you could imagine, it is a figure that is smaller than the budget of the sitting,hich i am now new york city, it is a figure two sense ofover the world expenditure on military. while on one hand, we can talk about how much gets done with the money, it is important to put it in the context that in fact, it given what is going on with global challenges, it is clearly not enough. it averages out to be about six dollars per person per year. terms of what gets done, anything you can imagine in of peacekeeping,
negotiations and delegate , support tos refugees, advocacy for women's writes -- women's rights. of access to water, givenng you can imagine, by governments to a mandates to the system in terms of what it needs to do. in terms of the programs that are funded, i believe they refugeentary, assistance, poverty and inequality. how many programs overall are supported? of the agencies, there are about 33. you can make an analogy at the national lever -- national level
with various industries -- ministries. thewill see that at international level, there is a counterpart. view of thent of different agencies, you have a large number. in terms of the number of individual programs, that has to be running into the thousands. because the programs themselves will be translated into a whole range from looking at the u.s. specifically as a bureaucracy, i guess, are there too many programs? are there efforts to consolidate or perform some of the aspects of the united nations? guest: yes, there are. as with any structure, you get a .ot of inter-agency work certainly, there is a lot of discussion. there has been since the u.n. was founded about whether or not
it could be structured to be more efficient. there are a lot of ideas about how to measure efficiency. for some people, you would measure efficiency by making sure that the same agency does not seem to be running the same program. parte other hand, a large of the united nations is actually deal with really difficult issues, and keep governments together, and keep them talking. that is kind of a difficult thing to measure, depending on how you are looking at result. host: barbara adams of the global policy forum talking about the united nations. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 745-8002 for independents. let's start with darren in washington, d.c., independent line. caller: good morning. we love c-span.
i have two questions for you. one is could you explain the process a little better about how the head of the u.n. is .lected i know currently it is ban ki-moon. secondly, what is the u.n. doing to combat irruption? there was a story recently, i believe with the indian government, they found weapons and drugs on a ship -- do you know anything about that? if you could touch on that, that would be good. thank you again for coming on. guest: thank you. thank you for your questions. certainly, your first question is very very topical right now. we willetary-general, be having a new secretary-general chosen next year by the governments. the full process for doing it, the established way of doing it, is that the general assembly of
the united nations, which contains all of the members, actually of points, and makes the final decision. they make the decision based on a slate or recommendations that are brought from the security council. it has been the case in the past that the security council has only put forward one name. it has also been the case that the security council has essentially been through a lot of negotiations amongst itself to choose the leader. .hat has not always been smooth in the security council, we have five permanent members who have a veto and can say no to any particular decision coming out council.curity this has been exercised by different governments over time will beho secretary-general. right this minute, there is a campaign being launched to make the whole process more transparent, to basically make sure that there are qualifications that are
required. they put a very funny ad in "the ,conomist" not long ago pointing out how it works and saying, it should not work like this. the momentum is building behind idea that the security council would actually send some real .hoice to the general assembly the general assembly would be able, with all the members, to actually do a proper job of choosing who the next secretary-general will be. host: conroe, texas, george, you are up next. caller: i have a question of the ministry of overhead for the u.n. budget isntage of the spent on administrative overhead as opposed to funding actually programs? guest: for program funding, there is a formula.
i believe that the current figure is 7%. .hat is from the member states also, we are beginning to see the beginnings -- that was a silly sentence, wasn't it? we are beginning to see more private funding contributed to the united nations. that, in some cases, follows either the same formula, or it would have a different kind of formula. areof those arrangements done individually. we are facing at the moment a little bit of a mess of fragmentation of different initiatives driven because of the need for the u.n. to raise more money to do what it is doing. unfortunately, meaning that you have hundreds of different initiatives, which could be arranged, or reported about, in different ways. this essentially contributing to u.n. staff having to do multiple
s to a variety of different initiatives, and from my point of view, contributing to the inefficiency that people talk about. host: there is a viewer on twitter saying that millions of , again,flow overseas what does the u.n. do, and are they just a figurehead? and terms of the amount of money that flows directly to developing countries, or emergency situations, the amount that goes from the u.n. is not, by any means, a major percentage of that figure. the role that the u.n. plays is basically to bring together the different donors organ to contributors to make sure there is some sort of cohesion, and make sure that people are not tripping over each other. i do not think that is quite a figurehead, from the point of view of what you said.
i think it is also important that what the u.n. was set up to do, and what the u.n. can do very well in a number situations , is actually to bring together parties that find it difficult to come together otherwise, that would not talk to each other otherwise. it is the impartial, if you like, role of the united nations , according to what it was set up for, in terms of addressing human rights, protecting civilians in times of conflict. host: from virginia, here's paul, republican line. my phone is about to die. hang on. host: are you there? we will put you on hold, paul. let's go to tony in national, tennessee, independent line. caller: my question is this.
number one, you were talking about private funds coming into the union. when you elect the different officers, and elect to do things, it is done by how they countries are and who has the most votes, etc. there is no is -- way you can do it fairly. the unitedhing is states contributes the majority of the funds to the u.n. , which is astion question, why does the united states need the u.n. when we contribute to all these other countries anyway? that would be my question. why do we even need the united nations? thank you.
that the fact that the u.s. contributes to the 60% the i mentioned that is voluntary contributions, not required, is one of the ways that the u.s. is answering the questions of whether or not it needs to be involved, or whether the u.n. is helpful. there are some racing technical things that you will get with regard to radio waves, and postments with regards to systems. those are technical questions that need to be sorted out, and you need something international to do it. i don't know if you saw the speech -- there was a speech yesterday from president obama to the united nations in regards to sustainability goals. president obama was pretty straightforward that development
should be seen as an investment for everybody's security. it is directly connected, if you like, particularly in today's world, where so much of what is happening that affects us all is not happening only inside our .ountries in terms of your comment about the percentages and how much the u.s. contributes, while the u.s. is the largest contributor, it is also because, as we hear often, the u.s. is the largest economy. there is a formula that is related to that. in fact, if you take a closer look, we are seeing how much is contributed, but you don't see how much is actually reimbursed. it is not just a one-way contribution. totalcekeeping, the peacekeeping budget, that is actually paid back to the individual governments that make the contribution. the money that comes and goes
right back to the governments. on the amount that the united states needs to contribute -- the 22% confirmation to the regular budget -- the u.n. is consistently behind on the payment. the: barbara adams with global policy forum joining us to talk about funding and the u.n., especially as it meets today. this question,d who is responsible for auditing the money given to the u.n. by member countries? guest: one is that governments themselves. they each other some difficult questions. there is an independent group that looks at the u.n. budget. i will not spell out the acronym
because then you will think i just do u.n. acronyms. it is a particular group that is the expertise on the financial side that examines the u.n. budget before it goes for adoption. there is an office of internal oversight. there is an independent evaluation office. there are a variety of different mechanisms. ,ome of them of the governments and some of them independently, they are monitoring the payments of the united nations. host: from alabama, charles is up next. caller: good morning. it is good to talk to you this morning. those calling -- independent and government institutions that oversee each other, acting as our government does, is great. ist could -- my question
what could a disabled american civilian contribute? how could i contribute as a disabled american, in light of reports that some jobs, lots of jobs, were mishandled, and given to people who were supposed to be given to disabled americans? what can i do as a disabled american with a psychiatric, yet treated and controlled, disorder do to help the united nations in my own community? i will take my answer off the air. what i did not mention in the previous question, would you have given me a wonderful opportunity to comment on, is the work of the independent nongovernmental organization civil society groups that actually monitor the work of the united nations. we have just released a report
on that, raising some of the areas where the u.n. needs to pay attention and improve. on the issue with regards to people living with disability, that is one of the areas where nongovernmental organizations, people living with disability, have organized together consistently over the years, and have been very influential and making sure that the u.n. adopted a number of years ago a eew convention on th rights of people with disability. i cannot give you, right now, the name of the organization where they were together, but they continue to be active. yesterday, when i was in the united nations, i saw the person working with the organization. they are both very effective in terms of advocating for people with disabilities, and monitoring to make sure the u.n. supports employment opportunities in that area as well. host: (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans.
(202) 745-8002 for independents. barbara adams. she is a senior policy fellow of the global policy forum, joining us from new york, talking about the funding of the united nations, as the general assembly meets today. let's go to nancy, in georgia, independent line. caller: good morning. , tonted to ask ms. adams get back to the u.n. charter. a person wrote a piece about the u.n. charter at the beginning of the bush administration. recently, there was a court case, that goes to the previous caller's question about domestic law. it was bond versus the united states. this was unanimously decided against mr. obama. putin toto welcome mr.
america today. i'm really pleased to see him here. i also want to reiterate that russia pays out a lot of disability payments to ukraine, which is one of the reasons they have an interest there. the primary purpose of the united nations is to prevent nuclear war. i think that should be remembered, and we would have a lot left waste -- lot less waste. guest: a number of the decisions and the legal obligations that are struck by all governments in the united nations have eventually been taken back to the national level and turned into legislation. different countries have different ways of doing this. this has been something that has been particularly difficult for the united states. they have not been able, i think because of the state-federal arrangement, but i am by no means an expert on this, they have not been able to ratify so many of the treatise here in you referred to the u.n. charter -- not that one, but so many theties with regard to
rights of women, indigenous people, and so on. somebody other than me would be to explain why that is the case. host: you talk about what you referred to as the sustainable development goals. that is the lead editorial of "the new york times" this morning about the countries of the u.s. agreeing to them. could you tell us a little more about the price tag for this and what is expected by the member countries? guest: the price tag is way what we have looked at in the past with regard to developing programs in developing countries. the price tag is very large because the sustainable development goals are universal inclusive programs, addressing a full range of things where every country in the world needs to universality means that every country in the world needs to address them. it is looking at issues not only dealing with poverty and poor
countries, but poverty and once own country, issues dealing with inequality, climate change, the rights of women, education. that theo understood transformation that economies will need to go through, in terms of how they actually produce wealth, and how they go through production processes is going to need to change radically if we will come anywhere near meeting these targets, which is think many people agree on is essential. that there is a fund in the u.n. in which all of this money will be put. the funding will take place mainly at the national level by governments and countries. it is up to each government that agrees to these goals, to work
out how to implement them at the national level, as well as supporting the work that needs to take place internationally. host: from "wall street a 2030," saying deadline, does that sound right to you? guest: yes, it does. a huge amountieve of this on the way to 2030. we really need to start immediately. host: long beach, california, darrell is up next. caller: good morning. my question for mrs. adams is how she heard -- i mean, i heard something to be affect that the united states is putting nuclear weapons in the netherlands, and now we plan on putting 20 nuclear weapons into germany. i'm thinking, why would we want to take and give opportunity to other nations that have this kind of awesome power, and then
realized that we are putting it into countries that have areories of today they good, tomorrow they are bad. that is my question. guest: i'm not sure i can answer the details about nuclear weapons. i would say this. puts weapons, or when it has a military presence in another country, it is in the military base, in most of these cases. there are -- i don't know the figure, i think it is close to 100 military bases around the world. it is not a question of just loosely giving nuclear weapons to somebody else at their from that particular point of view. of course, the other part of the question would be to us people from the netherlands how they feel about this and what kind of conversation is taking place there. hi.: mary in washington, caller: i have a question about the organization of islamic cooperation in the u.n.
i want to know what the u.n. plans to do to hold them a little more responsible for the refugee or economic immigrants that is happening across europe. another question i have is recently the iranian president had announced that he plans on , to hezbollah, with the funny that america has now given over with the iranian bill -- can she answer my question on that? the seconderms of , that is a level of political affairs that i'm not sure i am anymore qualified than anyone else to comment on. one problem going on in the united nations, and more of the
government spend the united nations itself, is that so much of the politics, or agreements, making, tend to follow the pattern that the enemy of my enemy is a friend. you do find an alignment of interest taking place for that reason, which might not necessarily be what you expect. in terms of the question -- did not quite catch the first question. she: i miss that, but mentioned the refugees. if the current situation putting a strain on a budget set aside by the u.n. as far as refugees are concerned? is that is the case, can member countries contribute more? guest: it is certainly putting a strain. there is no budget that could be adequate because one cannot anticipate these problems. yes, it is putting a
tremendous strain. there are a lot of conversations, the second day general, i think you are aware, has been holding a lot of meetings with governments to address this situation and asked for increases in funding, including talking to all governments in the region about the responsibilities that they have in this area. one of the other things that happens that is really important to understand is this united big role ina addressing the causes, not only responding. that is what exist back to some of the comments about development and sustainable development goals, to make sure that countries grow and are more prosperous so that there is less conflict. host: in the area of development, before the new announcement, there was the millennial development goals. what kind of money was raised
for that? what can we say came as a result of that? guest: in terms of the millennium development goals, the amount of money that was theed -- i do not know exact figures. i know we were talking about their needing to be $200 million raise. this was more related to the overseas development systems, the public budget from donor countries. in terms of what was achieved, the millennium development goals targeted seven key areas of activity, in terms of women's childrend rights, health and education, issues dealing with water and sanitation, in terms of reducing poverty, and so on. there were particular targets and indicators for measuring success. if you look of the results of that, and there are a number of good reports on this, you will see that there was some success. they were not 100% achieved. in a way, there was a little bit
of a mistake in terms of how we measured success. some of the countries that show the most progress, and these were a number of countries in africa, actually, because you had an absolute target where they had to reduce poverty by withif you are starting much more poverty that other countries, even if you have much more success, you cannot reach the target. it was an unfortunate way of targeting what we call success. host: but your from mark and tennessee. caller: good morning. toould like to ask ms. adams answer, if she can, what would the world do without the united nations? i would remind them that the that aof nations president went to organize was turned down by the united nations and others. it might have prevented world
war ii. i think the peacekeeping of the snited nations since 1945 hav avoided major conflict. and, the many good things that happened in agencies are vital to the peace of the world now. thank you. guest: i am sometimes tempted to answer that question, which obviously i am asked quite often -- i'm pleased to take this lightly tongue-in-cheek -- ani am sometimes tempted to answer that if we did not have the united nations, maybe we would be committed to creating something much more stronger and better finance. it is very clear that we need some real commitment to face the global challenges that we have. we have to have this kind of global space. it has to be a lot stronger than it is. host: robert in montrose, new
york, independent line. caller: good morning. one thing i'm interested in is that what we have a world population now, here in the united states we are only 1000 million, less than 4% of the u.n. budget. why is it that we have to spend so much more to the u.n. and other countries that are members of the u.n. do not pay their fair share? another thing i am interested in , and i would like to follow up on the gentleman from tennessee -- even at my age, i do not remember the league of nations, but i remember the early conservative movement in the 1950's and 1960's. we had an organization called the john birch society that projected in the future that they would be ineffective. why is it that most of those who are dealing with the issues of
war in the middle east are being a burden to western europe and the united states? why not move east and move the population and disperse it around the world. think you very much. guest: the issue is not so much that one is measuring the by population figures, but by the economy, dollars. in that context, the u.s., even as less population, it has more to contribute, and much more to gain, frankly. reducetribution, if you it to per capita, rather than taking the overall figure, you will find that the contribution tot the u.s. is making
the u.n. and dealing with issues around the world is actually quite small. on the overseas development assistance ranking, the u.s. 29 of what out of contribution it is excellent making in that particular area. in terms of the question of how issues, and how different countries are actually getting involved, it is very desirelt to separate the and need of people to seek a better life, from wanting to go from countries to other ones that they see a successful. i do not think it is a geographic ink. i think it is obviously related to where things seem to be going better in the world. host: when it comes to issues of funding, and what countries contribute, is that settled
before the opening of the general assembly? is it done all year round? is there a special session to determine these figures? guest: that is not the business for today. the business for today is related to the sustainable development goals and the issues that your callers have race related to crises around the world. the u.n. has a budget set every two years. it prepares for that within the is aed nations, there committee, finance and administration, i think, that is dedicated to this work. the delivery and negotiate with each other on what they prepare as the budget. in budget has not grown real terms. even though the mandates that governments are giving the u.n. are growing over time. host: one more call.
this is patrick from michigan. theer: my question is problem that happened in haiti, where the u.n. set up a camp, and they dumped raw sewage into the streams, and people were all affected with cholera, and everything else, how could that possibly have happened and what steps have been taken to make sure that does not happen in the future? guest: certainly, there are lessons learned from situations like the one you describe. obviously, one would want those lessons to be learned before, rather than after, something like that happens. when the u.n. is involved in some of the activities, more on the peacekeeping side because it is basically various different governments around the world contributing with troops. providing therall criteria and guidelines for
training requirements. as you point out, there is definitely improvement -- room for improvement. host: the discussion about the funding of the u.n. with barbara adams of the global policy forum. she is >> republican members of congress have offered numeral spills to defund planned parenthood because of what they say is the sale of fetal tissue for medical research. the congressional budget office estimates that planned parenthood receives $450 million a year from the federal government. our live coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3.
>> the annual documentary competition for students in grades 6-12. it is not opportunity for students to think critically by creating a five-seven minute documentary in which they can express their views. the purpose is to get involved because it gives them the opportunity at a platform to have their voices heard. viewsy can express those by creating a documentary. we do have a wide range of entries. the most important aspect for every documentary we get is going to be content. we have had winners in the past aeate their videos by using cell phone and others who created using more high-tech equipment. once again, it is really the content that matters and shines through in these documentaries. the response from students in the past has been great. differentcreated many
videos on issues important to them. education,range from the economy, and the environment. >> having the water in the river would have many them -- would have many positive impacts. >> we have definitely cut expenses. humans cannot run without food. , studentso the igea with disabilities are not given the opportunity for an education. >> what is the most important you want candidates to discuss in the 2016 presidential campaign? there are many different candidates discussing several issues. one of the key requirements increasing documentaries is to include some c-span footage. this put it should really complement and further their point of view, and not just him and it the video. it is a great way for them to include more information that
furthers their points. >> the first bill i will find today is the water resources reform and development act. fish sticks at mystery meat tacos. >> there is a role the federal government plays. it is especially vital for students with disabilities. >> students and teachers can go to our website. it is studentcam.org. they can find more information on the requirements. the calcified teacher tips, rulebooks, more information about prices, incorporating c-span video. is january 20, 2016 for this year's competition. it is when you're away from the next presidential inauguration o -- it is onea
year away from the presidential big moderation. thehen john steps down from position in october. part of the letter reads, i running to be your speaker because i know the people's house works best in the leadership listens to members and respects the legislative process interested to committees. but political reports that to become the 54th speaker of the house, kevin mccarthy believed to do something he has never done before. find 218 supporters on the floor. he has a room to only clues 29 republican members. that really require him to navigate the same political currents inside the party as a whole that john boehner of ohio used. house majority leader mccarthy delivered a foreign-policy speech to the initiative in washington, emphasizing the need
for u.s. leadership. good afternoon and thank you for coming. family cofounder of the initiative. today is something of a milestone for the initiative because we are releasing our first book "choosing to lead." the book presents a comprehensive governing agenda on foreign-policy and national security and it is written for the next president of the united states. it is available for free download at choosingtolead.net. we are honored to launch a new book with the house majority leader kevin mccarthy. recite line by line of his extensive biography and a congressman's, i would like to -- and a congressman's, i would like to touch on two things.
career, stage of his his peers have chosen him as a leader. he was elected national chairman of the young republicans in 1999, as a freshman in the california assembly, he was elected unanimously as the republican leader. a first in the assembly history for a freshman member. he was elected to the house in 2006 and in a short period of time, he was elected as house majority leader. is all prologue and we have only begun to see his leadership. the second thing i would like to emphasize about leader mccarthy is his work on foreign-policy. he has done his homework on the issues we face today. he has made the time to travel overseas, meet with heads of government, and foreign minister's. his eloquent remarks at the
museum in tunisia one week after the terrorist attack their show a clear understanding of international terrorism and its many dimensions. he also knows that current efforts are insufficient. he has observed the war on terrorism is not going to lead itself. it is also clear from talking with him that what guides his thinking on foreign-policy hastions is the lessons he learned from studying the lives of churchill, washington, and lincoln. he will talk more about their influence in his remarks today. we invited leader mccarthy to give an address on america's role in the world. we are deeply grateful that he accepted our invitation. please welcome the house majority leader, kevin mccarthy. [applause]
kevin mccarthy: thank you very much. there are two american leaders in particular that i look to. i have portraits of them. abraham lincoln and ronald reagan. has a hugecoln portrait in black and white. across the hallway is ronald reagan in color and smiling. i said there many days and i wonder, what did these leaders give us today? you know what ligon would tell us? believe in the exceptionalism of this country. we are different than any other country before us. -- theent why i believe reason why i believe lincoln would say this is the gettysburg address. have you ever listen to the others?
, our forefathers brought forth a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. he goes on to say the government is of the people, by the people, and for the people. it will not perish from earth. he did not say that if we failed, england or france would pick up the torch. we were not conceived in liberty and dedicated that all men were created equal. if years back, i was in the rotunda. the president of israel at the time, 92 years old, was there to receive a medal. he looks out at us and says, you live on the greatest nation that has ever been on the face of the earth. not the greatest nation of our time, but on the face of the earth. he looks to us and he says, do your greatness comes from? it is not what you take, it is
what you give. america will give the ultimate sacrifice of life so another country can have freedom. with that freedom comes human rights and a stronger economy. that is who we are. the second bit of advice i believe ligon would tell us is, don't sit and blame others for your problems. except who you are, but find a solution. lincoln was elected november 1860, sworn in march 1861. in those few months, seven states left the union. never once did he blamed buchanan, the little different than our white house today. right? the advice reagan would tell us, and i think this would be directed to the current president. peace with freedom is meaningless. history has proven that most strive to have police like chamberlain.
they never achieve freedom. the best example is reagan late in his second term. when he is in iceland with gorbachev. he sits down and pretty much gets almost everything he asks more. gorbachev asked for the one last item, to end the research of fbi. reagan said no but offered him something more, a share. gorbachev said no. reagan got up and walked away from the table. left, with the berlin wall have collapsed, with the soviet union have collapsed? peace without freedom is meaningless. a little side note. do you realize what the current president barack obama has? those two presidents both won prize.el peace reagan did not, what brought
people freedom. reagan would say, speak the truth about our enemies and ourselves. we cannot be afraid to call the enemy what it is. radical, islamic terrorism. we also cannot be afraid to say the truth about america. we are exceptional. we are the force for good in the world. as reagan said at the world institute of national affairs and london, when three people cease telling the truth about, and to their adversaries, they cease telling the truth to themselves. , unless thef state truth be spoken, it ceases to exist. and the last bit of advice , do notwould tell us put off tough decisions for future generations. lincoln had a very tough decision. but the debate of slavery did
not begin in 1850. it started with the creation of a country. the forefathers thought it was too divisive so they put it to the side. in essence, it had to be hundreds of thousands of grandchildren to make that decision. have the same difficult decision, but this white house is managing the decline and putting us in tough >> when america was seen as the world shining light of freedom and justice. that is the america i want for my children. before i even became majority
leader, i had a passion for world affairs, because i believe that anyone who wants to lead in washington must commit to america's leadership among the community of nations. and brace america's role and responsibilities preserving safety and security, peace and prosperity, not just within our borders, but beyond. in the past few years alone, i have visited poland, hungary, estonia, russia, and georgia. i have met with prime minister netanyahu in israel, visited the allies in the arab gulf, trouble withnisia and iraq, met ukraine,dent of yo and met with our allies in germany, france, and the united kingdom. understanding the world, and the wisdom to act when needed, is not measured in frequent flyer
miles for endless meetings. affective foreign policy is not about effort, it is measured by success. success in foreign policy, just like the mustard policy, must be governed by sound, unshakable principles. without a clearly stated framework for action, our emmy's will be them -- enemies will be emboldened by uncertainty and indecision. here is the first and most important principle of american foreign-policy, the world is a safer place when america leads. candidate obama crisscrossing europe, speaking before millions. he traveled to berlin to speak to finding crowds with the goal -- fawning crowds with the goal of improving reputation, but it is not given to those who ask
for it, granted only to those who earn it. when it comes to dictators, tyrants, and terrorists, strength and the threat of force is the only language they understand. we have lost the respect of our allies and adversaries alike. we have isolated israel, while ing iran, russia, and extending influence around the world. wherever you look, the world is less safe and less secure because america is less engaged. the america we need and deserve is strong, respected, appreciated, and feared, a country where the noble cause of freedom inspires millions to stand up and speak out and fight
tyranny and injustice, and pursue the individual liberty and human rights. that leads to the second resolvee, strength and brings peace and security. the absence of leadership over the past six years has had horrific consequences all across the globe, and it is getting worse. our enemy, rogue nations or terrorist groups, see us talk about redlines not to be crossed, defiantly challenging us and crossing them. all too often, america makes bold claims followed by weak response or no response. as a result, our enemies get stronger and america gets weaker. today, our army is that the lowest number since 1940. our troop readiness is severely compromised.
our active soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are being neglected after they fought in two wars. those who return home are being disrespected by the v.a. they can't keep this simple promise to meet the need when they need it most, but there is no weakness in these men and women. they are heroes who fought to ves,'cath, bombed the secured the peace in iraq. the weakness does not lie with them or the officers leading them. the weakness lies with the commander in chief. the reagan doctrine worked because the soviets knew that there was not one inch of soil that we would concede to the spread of communism, not one dollar that we would not spend to spread freedom. peace comes through strength,
not retreat. take your's response to russia, the aggression -- take europe's response to russia. withdrawn states has -- we rolled out the red carpet, a direct threat to radar -- nato and the solidarity of our alliance, yet efforts to roll back russian aggression has failed. seesawednistration has regarding the illegal annexation of crimea and a ground war in
eastern koran -- ukraine that continues today, virtually unacknowledged by this white house. the challenge within ukraine is the greatest threat to european security since world war ii. stop letting vladimir putin set the agenda, stop turning a blind eye to russian aggression. it is time for america to step up, not back down, and that starts with providing ukrainian fighting forces with legal aid. memorandathe budapest agree4 in which ukraine to relinquish nuclear weapons inherited from the soviet union in exchange for the united states, the u.k., and russia to preserve, respect ukraine's of sovereignty and territorial integrity.
it is bad enough that russia has violated the memoranda. we should live up to it. the obama administration has argued that providing defense weapons will only encourage additional russian aggression. i disagree. it is weakness that fuels russian aggression, not western actions. president's response to russian aggression should not be to sit down and talk, but to consider serious sanctions that target president putin personally. they oligarchs who sustain his rain, and their cronies who help them avoid sanctions. we should be making it more difficult for gas from to do business -- the major russian gas company to do business, fueling vladimir putin's belligerent action.
threatening to cut gas off to ukraine should not be mistaken for anything else than an act of hostility. it is time to make it much tougher for them to do their dirty business. we must use american energy to help our allies. it defies belief that the president would allow the ban on iranian oil exports to be lifted and also stand by while russia blackmails a continent. to use energy as a weapon against our friends and allies, let us use our energy resources to set them free. america and oil gas wherever we , the thirdy in need principle for foreign-policy, start standing with our friends and start challenging our adversaries. we must also stand by the side
of those who are on our side. we should support those who support freedom and stability, and oppose those who enslave their own people, inspire billions of people across the globe that one day by standing with america, they too can live in free prosperity. no two countries on earth exemplify this principle more than our relationships with israel and iran. i recently joined three dozen congressional members on a trip , our strongest, closest ally in the region. we listened to people from every political perspective, from decision-makers to ordinary citizens, and all these conversations, we were left with one lasting impression, that people who know iran best
trusted them the least. -- trust them the least. israel, saudi arabia, egypt, they know a nuclear iran is a recipe for chaos. many have been coerced into statements of support, but they know full well the dangers of a nuclear armed iran, and they told us behind closed doors that the iranian deal is the worst decision america can make. this is the same country that has funded terrorists for a generation, the same country that has repeatedly said america is the great sage and, the same country that deceive the world with nuclear infrastructure for more than a decade. whats neighbors know president obama once said, the new deal is better than a bad deal, a better approach was tougher sanctions, not to eliminate them.
, i these reasons and more stand with the majority of the american people on a nuclear deal with iran. why? this agreement fails to achieve what we all want, safety, security, and stability in the middle east and across the world. instead, i nuclear-armed iran will bring terror and war, and more destruction. easteople of the middle deserve better, and so to the american people. the evidence of iranian tension is overwhelming. from the funding of hezbollah, to the use of force in actively supporting another force after the staging of the coup against the human president -- yemen president. it is unconscionable that the president's nuclear deal does
nothing to restrain iranian backed terror. it enhances it. iran spends about $16 billion per year, a conservative estimate, backing its proxies. what do we think iran will do with $150 billion? perspective, that is as large or larger than the recent bailout of greece. funding fored terrorism is the greatest fear from our allies in the region as a direct result of humiliating concessions by president obama and secretary kerry. safety, security, and stability in the middle east and around the world. we must once again take control y, the sanctions that brought them to the table was working, so let us do what
works, because the president chose to submit this agreement not as a treaty, the next president is not bound by it. the next president can take a new approach, one based on a position of strength, not a concessions. sanction relief should only be granted when nations abandoned a coordinated campaign of violence and terrorism. you don't induce your enemies into good behavior, you make it painful to continue the bad behavior. iran is not the only challenge that we face in the middle east. iraq is a country where americans have fought and died to bring stability and protected security. thatld venture to guess all 15 candidates for president have been asked that same question, would you have gone to war if you knew what you knew now.
you know what question i have not heard the democrats ask? if you knew our total unconditional withdrawal from iraq with lead to the creation and expansion of isis, the mass execution of moderate moslems, the slaughter of coptic christians, to syrian children washing ashore as they fled bashar al-assad, would you still support the president's complete withdrawal from iraq? would you still defend drawing redlines without consequences? would you support a policy that has given isis a caliphate the size of the u.k.? would you give up cities like ramadi, where marines gave the last measure of devotion so the president could keep a campaign promise? i look for to the question being asked.
we need an entirely new policy in iraq and syria. the iraqi army is no longer up to the task, and the coalition air were against isis in iraq and syria have failed to reverse 's gains. the u.s. needs to engage and meet again. our goal should be to defeat isis, marginalize iranian influence, and help to foster a system of political inclusiveness rather than sectarian division. the u.s. and our allies should also consider putting a limited number of u.s. special forces personnel on the ground and call inthe wire to help truly effective air strikes and provide more effective support to the iraq he army, the sunni, and kurdish units engaged in the fight. many combat missions flown over iraq come back without ever dropping a bomb. this is because we have limited intelligence.
we have tied the hands of our commanders and micromanaged from the white house. when we ask our brave men and women to risk our lives every and we must fight to win empower them to fight and win. in addition to real hard power, we could do more on the soft power as well. unlike during the surge in iraq, when general petraeus had an effective political strategy to , noh the military strategy such effort exists today. working with iragi leaders and including a nonsectarian government plan is essential to moving forward. in nearby syria, the situation is even worse and bleak. to decision to back down bashar al-assad caused insurmountable harm to america's
credibility, but it did not end there. this administration engage with russia, one of bashar al-assad's top supporters, to broker an agreement for the destruction of bashar al-assad's chemical weapons. protectively, he continues to use chemical weapons to the day. and russia? rapidly increasing support for bashar al-assad, tanks, personnel, and fighter jets. when president obama back down, russia and iran doubled down. syria amongnexus in russia, iran, and bashar al-assad has all but assured the failure of this administration's plan to coax bashar al-assad from power. theconflict has created worst refugee crisis since world war ii. roughly half of syria's
population has been displaced. over 4 million have fled to horton, lebanon, and turkey, and europe. turkey,rdan, lebanon, and europe. how heartbreaking was it when we all watched a young three-year-old boy face down on the beach of turkey? it brought reality home. the situation only appears to be getting worse. finally, i think we should work with our allies to establish a no-fly zone over northern city -- syria. this safe zone with stem the flow of refugees and allow sanctuary for the syrian rebels to take on isis, al qaeda, affiliated groups. whether it is in the form of isis or al qaeda or other radical islamic movements, one thing is clear. politically correct speech will
not defeat the enemy. we must engage this war with radical islam as though our life depends on it, because it does. we have watched london, paris, new york, and washington. we have all seen the face of terror. now let me be clear, this is not the view of a great majority of moslems here and abroad. american moslems make this country better, in the same is true of the millions of moslems across the world, they reject extremism as much as we do. ofmall percentage well-funded islamic fanatics hate those moderate moslems as much as christians and juice, and they will stop at nothing to rid the world of all three. , and if ipeats itself
look at history of where we are, it seems a lot like 1979. there are a lot of things falling into familiar categories. the soviets invading afghanistan, and today russia in crimea and ukraine. islamic fanatics overtaking an embassy of hours in iran, , and therehostage are four hostages there today. not even to count the number murdered by isis throughout the world. the last time a u.s. ambassador was killed on foreign soil, a direct reflection of the respect and fear that other countries afghanistan,979 in and stephen and the three brave americans in libya. then and now, the conflict is a
direct result of a week american leadership. .- wak american leadership it only took 10 years to go from a world entails to freeing hostages, to the tumbling of the berlin wall, to the liberating the eastern block, to the communist soviet union collapsing. it all caps and -- happened because of america's leadership and resolve, three fundamental principles guiding us forward. the world is safer when america leads. strength and resolve for the best recipe for peace and security. allies stands with its and challenges its adversaries, there is no substitute for american leadership, and there is no time like the president to start -- present to start. the fate of the world is in our
hands. done soo what must be that someday we can tell our children that we protected freedom when it was challenged the most, that we stood up to tyrants and terrorists, that we stood with those who were oppressed and freedom loving, that we became the america that the world has counted on so many times once again. you and your children deserve that america. thank you and god bless. >> kevin mccarthy announced he's officially seeking the job of house speaker. "i'mof the letter reads running to be your speaker because another people's house works best when the leadership you elect respects the
legislative process. politico reports that you become the speaker, kevin mccarthy will need to do something he's never done before, find 200 18 supporters on the floor. the story says we have room to lose only 29 republican members but will require -- daniel webster of florida is the only other announced contender to succeed john boehner. when, president obama and vladimir putin that today for the first time in more than a year. we see them here just the for the meeting. president obama: thank you, everybody. >> the leaders disagree on how